Excellent article on the economics (and myths) of MLB

[PittPanthers90]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html#continue

[vandelay industries]

I'm pretty sure that everyone here agrees that the entire system of baseball needs to be changed or is at the core of the Pirates (and other small markets) constant struggles. This is also why comparing the Pirates plight, spending, and success to that of the Steelers and Penguins is foolhardy from the start. They both compete in more "fair" climates, leagues with a cap. Be real with yourself, would the Pens and Steelers, if there was no salary cap in their respective sports, spend as much as other teams? No way, they'd be at the bottom of league spending. That dosn't mean they wouldn't be successful, just that they'd be thrifty also.

However, the fact remains that the system is what it is and it isn't changing anytime soon. In light of that, why not focus on how we need to build a team and win within the current economic climate of baseball.

[PittPanthers90]

I'm pretty sure that everyone here agrees that the entire system of baseball needs to be changed or is at the core of the Pirates (and other small markets) constant struggles. This is also why comparing the Pirates plight, spending, and success to that of the Steelers and Penguins is foolhardy from the start. They both compete in more "fair" climates, leagues with a cap. Be real with yourself, would the Pens and Steelers, if there was no salary cap in their respective sports, spend as much as other teams? No way, they'd be at the bottom of league spending. That dosn't mean they wouldn't be successful, just that they'd be thrifty also.

However, the fact remains that the system is what it is and it isn't changing anytime soon. In light of that, why not focus on how we need to build a team and win within the current economic climate of baseball.

I never ONCE compared to the Pens and Steelers. (others have, i understand cap vs non-cap)

But I am amazed at some hate thrown towards the Pens by the supporters of the FO and BN. (And by the organization itself, see that hatchet job article by that goofball for the "official bucs blog site")

What about when it talked about team spending itself. You gleaned the part of MLB, now re-read the part of individual team spending and the excuses people buy into!

[exNCite]

Vandelay is right. You would be very hard put to find someone here who doesn't think that the economic structure of baseball stinks. One problem with the article is that it suggests that millionaire and billionaire owners should spend their own money, money which most likely was earned outside of baseball, on their teams. That's like saying stockholders in Hostess should tap into their savings accounts and send money to the controller of the company because Hostess Twinkies should continue to be sold.

Teams have different income streams. They have different abilities to pay players. Is there anything wrong with the Yankees paying more for a player than the Pirates can afford to pay? Not really. At least in the real world. If I want to buy a new model car from a dealer when they first come out and only want to pay a normal discount from the MSRP, but someone else is willing to pay MSRP or even a premium to it, guess who gets the car? But baseball isn't the real world. It's a closed monopoly that is dependent on an annual competition under a pre-determined format to establish the winner. It therefore must have have everyone operating in the same economic structure. It's who does a better job evaluating, acquiring and teaching the better talent, (and that talent performing better than the talent on the other teams), with the same purse size that should determine a champion. Until that exists, there will ALWAYS be the haves and the have-nots.

I think this paragraph from the article says it all.

Isn't it the talent level they should be concerned about? What if the Yankees had decided Iwakuma was their missing piece and guaranteed him $5 million? Would it matter? Not to them. They'd be getting the same pitcher with the same level of talent. But they'd be filling their own need at the price it took to get him there. And that's the point about baseball. Teams spend what they need to in order to get where they need to go. MLB is not the NFL, where teams are competing on an equal economic footing with the same spending limits.

[vandelay industries]

I never ONCE compared to the Pens and Steelers. (others have, i understand cap vs non-cap)

But I am amazed at some hate thrown towards the Pens by the supporters of the FO and BN. (And by the organization itself, see that hatchet job article by that goofball for the "official bucs blog site")

What about when it talked about team spending itself. You gleaned the part of MLB, now re-read the part of individual team spending and the excuses people buy into!

Again, it's a misunderstanding on your part regarding comprehension. Nobody that supports the FO hates the Pens. Actually I, and I feel comfortable saying we as a whole, love the Pens. It's simply another strawman fallacy you've bought into.

The comparisons are meant to put into perspective what the Pens did and are doing, not to bash them.

1. They built their team the right way, just as the Pirates are doing, through the draft. They then supplement via FA now that their core drafted and developed players are playing well.

2. Before there was a cap, the Pens were one of the lowest payrolled teams in the league. Hence why the pipe dream of Mario saving the Pirates is foolish as when he was presented with a no cap league he didn't spend.

Those are the comparisons made. They're not slamming or slander of the Pens.

I'll read more of your article later and comment on what you asked, but it'd be nice if you provided me the same courtesy as I directly replied to numerous comments of yours in the Smizik thread that you didn't specifically address or attempt to rebut to foster further discussion.

Quid pro quo.

[exNCite]

What's REALLY hysterical is that Smizick posted the same article and PP90 says he posted the same thing on another thread. Comments are the same old same old.

[PittPanthers90]

What's REALLY hysterical is that Smizick posted the same article and PP90 says he posted the same thing on another thread. Comments are the same old same old.

A poster posted that link in the Yahoo piece on the pirates upcoming season (it wasn't a kind article by Yahoo, FACTUAL, but unkind)

BTW, what does Smizik blog have to do with this discussion on the economics discussed in this article

Is someone OBSESSED?! :P

[Kipper]

Again, it's a misunderstanding on your part regarding comprehension. Nobody that supports the FO hates the Pens. Actually I, and I feel comfortable saying we as a whole, love the Pens. It's simply another strawman fallacy you've bought into.

The comparisons are meant to put into perspective what the Pens did and are doing, not to bash them.

1. They built their team the right way, just as the Pirates are doing, through the draft. They then supplement via FA now that their core drafted and developed players are playing well.

2. Before there was a cap, the Pens were one of the lowest payrolled teams in the league. Hence why the pipe dream of Mario saving the Pirates is foolish as when he was presented with a no cap league he didn't spend.

Those are the comparisons made. They're not slamming or slander of the Pens.

I'll read more of your article later and comment on what you asked, but it'd be nice if you provided me the same courtesy as I directly replied to numerous comments of yours in the Smizik thread that you didn't specifically address or attempt to rebut to foster further discussion.

Quid pro quo.

Actually Vandelay and (PP90.. pay attention this is mainly for you....)...

The Pens had the LOWEST payroll in the NHL 2 years after there was a salary cap in place one of the 5 lowest payrolls the first year after a cap was implemented. We aren't talking about Mario Lemieux's money since Mario is more of a figurehead type of owner, the money man behind the Pittsburgh Penguins is BILLIONAIRE Ron Burkle who has more net worth than any of the other 2 sports teams owners in Pittsburgh have combined. If we lived in a world that treated people fairly based on things like facts, Burkle would have had the Penguins at least middle of the pack in spending based on his vast amount of wealth... but he didn't and without a Salary Cap, the Pens would be like the Pittbsurgh Pirates - low spenders. The Pittsburgh Steelers would be like the Pirates - low spenders. The Pirates have had for years a very high ticket price and high concession prices. When they stunk, their payroll was down because they were only filling up 11-12K per game. When they were good, the revenue streams went up, payroll increased and the rest is history. What isn't part of that history is a billionaire owner spending wads of his own money to boost payroll WITHOUT the revenue streams coming in. Perhaps Burkle invested a few million towards payroll after 2006-07 into the payroll but that was on the backs of a greatly increased revenue stream, young players, the core players getting ready to be paid and the promise at some point of a new arena being built. It was an investment build on a fairly strong basis that the investment would be returned.

That's what businessmen do. They don't invest money to lose money. Morons do that and retards suggest it. The Pittsburgh Pirates have one of the lowest ticket prices in MLB. Thats' great for the fans that attend games, but bad for revenue and bad for payroll. Increase tickets, the public *****es. Have a payroll rightfully based around the revenue streams and people *****. One way or another there's a lot of *****ing by a lot of people that can't grasp the economics of baseball. What is unfair is how the Pirates are look at solely from a money standpoint by a lot of ignorant based people in the public and the fans while the Steelers and Penguins aren't simply because of 1 thing - the Pirates don't play under a Salary Cap, the other 2 teams do. The Pirates don't have the luxury of escaping the scrutiny that the other 2 teams have.

I love the Steelers and Pens. I would be running a site and message board committed to those teams along with the Pens and have over 40K posts if I didn't, so nobody can try and claim that I am biased any way. I'm much more fair and equal with regards to all 3 teams than most people are.

[PittPanthers90]

Some people but I never tried to compare the two teams. I only mentioned that the FO and ownership was jealous of them (see Paul Ladewski hatchet job)

If we were one side would point to economics before and after

The other side would point to the way during the low and now high years the pens go out of their way for the fans and never insult their intelligence!

This comparison is useless. I was hoping for more a debate as to how this blogger points out the fallacy of what teams can spend.

As he is from Seattle I doubt he even cares about Pro/Anti Nutting

[Kipper]

Some people but I never tried to compare the two teams. I only mentioned that the FO and ownership was jealous of them (see Paul Ladewski hatchet job)

If we were one side would point to economics before and after

The other side would point to the way during the low and now high years the pens go out of their way for the fans and never insult their intelligence!

This comparison is useless. I was hoping for more a debate as to how this blogger points out the fallacy of what teams can spend.

As he is from Seattle I doubt he even cares about Pro/Anti Nutting

Paul Ledewski's article was bad, there's no disputing that but JFC that was over a year ago if I remember correctly and it was from the same blog that John Perrotto wrote for. Now, Perrotto "claims" with once again nop facts to back it up that he was fired from that Nutting owned publication because of the negativity he wrote about the Pirates. If you want to believe this then I have some ocean front property to sell you in Minnesota. Perrotto constantly wrote "negative" blog articles over there, if that was an "issue" errotto would've been fired after the 1st one, not after writing them for however long he did. That's just logics. He'd have probably been told to cool first as well.

People would love to find the conspiracy theory with Paul Ladewski and the Pirates Report (I think that was what it was called) but it doesn't exist. You guys are just a bunch of tin foil hat wearing types. always looking for a conspiracy and pushing "assumptions" that aren't backed up with concrete evidence. Me? I like to see some facts, if I don't have them, then I have my personal opinion. What my personal opinion however doesn't do is replace facts and be issued as a factual argument to please a personal bias.

Who cares what your personal opinion about Public Relations is? You completely missed the point that 1 team with a Billionaire owner had the lowest and 5 lowest team payrolls in a capped league (Pens and Ron Burkle) and people like you do nothing but point constant fingers at the Nuttings and the Pirates payroll in a league that doesn't even have a cap. The Pens had some of the NHL's lowest payrolls in an uncapped league heading into the NHL's strike season with a billionaire owner. How much do you think that salary cap WITH success from building through the draft has helped the Pens? That salary cap is an advantage, one that the Pirates don't have competitively in the league they play in but it's an advantage from a PR standpoint because Pens and Steelers fans rarely if ever discuss payroll. There's no need to, it's capped and most teams in both leagues pay up to the cap or above the floor. The Pirates would likely follow suit if they were afforded the same advantage but they aren't. They don't get the PR gift, instead they get to know that there's a number of uninformed, angry "imitation-fans" out there along with the 3rd rate media in Pittsburgh ragging on their payroll numbers every chance they can get.

If I had the time, I'd ask my grandfather who lives in seattle what this guys credibility is in the first place but I don't really care too much because the Article wasn't worth reading half of the way through once I got to this bundle of stupid..

What do A's owner Lew Wolff and Rays owner Stuart Sternberg have in common? They are both funding their teams in the lowest echelons of baseball while they wait for the day when they can score a brand new, taxpayer-financed ballpark that can give them tons of other people's money to spend.
Both men have a pile of their own cash and plenty of wealthy friends to go in on a stadium with them, or build a new one right where their teams currently reside. But they don't want to do that. It's not the baseball way. So, they keep funding their teams at the lowest levels of the game, spending little more than their paltry revenues coming in, so that franchise value can be maintained. All in the hopes that they'll hit the taxpayer-funded jackpot like the majority of teams in baseball.
And fans, bloggers, some mainstream media, the Moneyball book and movie, and anyone not really paying attention keeps letting them get away with it. Keep allowing these smokescreen GMs to keep people gasping over their cost-effectiveness while ignoring the fact their team owners are wealthy enough to spend a whole lot more than they currently are.

first of all here is a news alert for this writer and you and anyone else that thought and thinks differently.... Every owner operates their team with other people's money. the investment by every owner or most (ones that aren't inheriting) is what they pay in to own a team or the buying of shares etc... the rest of the operations are made primarily with revenue that teams make. There's plenty out there on the internet to go and find information for teams to come to a close figure on what their payroll is and their general revenue. I was able to do it in the past with regards to the Pirates. I bet if you went out and found all of the revenue streams for say the Yankees and added it all up it would exceed their payroll number (since there's various us things that are paid for with revenue that most fans never account for like the minor leagues, travel, scouts, management, stadium costs, employees there, advertising, etc....)

Seriously, who believes that the Rooney family is $100 million per year rich enough to run an NFL franchise? They aren't, not without the revenue they pull in and the salary cap. If Billionaire Ron Burkle wasn't "rich enough" to spend more than the $26 or so million that bottomed out in the NHL in 2006-07, then what does that make Dan Rooney?

Teams operate based on their revenue streams. Some owners will invest their own money earlier in a gamble on their own team increasing revenue streams but they do this when they are more sure of the result. As I mentioned, no businessman is in any business to "lose" money. When the gamble doesn't pan out, that's when you see teams sell off players, drop payroll and "rebuild". They got in a hole and are making their money back. There could be a time when the Pirates, when Nutting invest into a future gamble but considering this market and it's uncertainty in regards to revenues (The Pirates have NEVER been big attendance drawers) the gamble won't be huge and the gamble is going to have to be more of a sure thing. We'll call it smart investments. Right now isn't that time.

Besides, by the time Mccutchen is extended, when that happens, the Pirates payroll is going to probably be at or near it's current max based on revenue. If the Pirates start out the season below "assumed max revenue" it's to keep in mind that there's one player not yet signed that will take it all up. It's like keeping money in the bank for that item you have to wait a few months down the road to be released for you to buy it. You have the money now, save it. If you don't then you are using your credit card and paying it back with no guarantees of increased revenue to help out.

[PittPanthers90]

Besides, by the time Mccutchen is extended, when that happens,

That is quite a huge assumption. Two sides are far apart on the deal and I think Cutch will just do the 1yr deals until he can be set free from (to quote a notorious catcher) "baseball hell"

[PittPanthers90]

the Article wasn't worth reading half of the way through once I got to this bundle of stupid..

(This quote is a quote that Kipper pulled from the article, it is not his words) And fans, bloggers, some mainstream media, the Moneyball book and movie, and anyone not really paying attention keeps letting them get away with it. Keep allowing these smokescreen GMs to keep people gasping over their cost-effectiveness while ignoring the fact their team owners are wealthy enough to spend a whole lot more than they currently are.

This writer has hit the nail squarely on the head. Why you call it stupid, because quite frankly, he has called you out on your position. Quite effectively I might add.

He has put quite eloquently all the thoughts of us so call Anti-Nutting people. He did it without hyperbole as he isn't emotionally invested in it like us Pirate fans are.

The only thing you can say is to call it stupid, choose to ignore half the article (your own words about stopping reading), and then take the phrase other peoples money and twist it to fit your ideas.

Folks wondered how the Washington Nationals could possibly survive after their so-called crippling Jayson Werth contract. Well, surprise, surprise. They're now in on Fielder. Small wonder, considering MLB moved them out of Montreal -- a city that wouldn't give them a new ballpark -- to Washington, D.C., which promptly coughed up that cash cow. Oh, yeah, the Nationals have a billionaire owner and are about to renegotiate a local TV deal which should bring about $30 million more in annual revenue to the team. Meaning the billionaire could likely keep Werth and Fielder without dipping into his own deep pockets.

Since you missed this quote, just wanted to show you how it is possible to sign REAL players, and not 3rd rate retreads looking for one last paycheck before retiring (or looking to rebound and play for a real contract somewhere else)

[exNCite]

Folks wondered how the Washington Nationals could possibly survive after their so-called crippling Jayson Werth contract. Well, surprise, surprise. They're now in on Fielder. Small wonder, considering MLB moved them out of Montreal -- a city that wouldn't give them a new ballpark -- to Washington, D.C., which promptly coughed up that cash cow. Oh, yeah, the Nationals have a billionaire owner and are about to renegotiate a local TV deal which should bring about $30 million more in annual revenue to the team. Meaning the billionaire could likely keep Werth and Fielder without dipping into his own deep pockets.

Since you missed this quote, just wanted to show you how it is possible to sign REAL players, and not 3rd rate retreads looking for one last paycheck before retiring (or looking to rebound and play for a real contract somewhere else)

Show me the evidence where this billionaire owner is spending his own money, money beyond the income stream generated by the business plan the Nats have in place. Without proof, your assumptions are pie-in-the-sky make believe. This is the problem I've repeatedly asked of you and any other nay-sayer who comes here. GIVE ME SPECIFICS. Is Jason Werth one of the players you think we should have signed just to prove that BN is willing to spend money? Did the "crippling" Jason Werth contract get a WS win for Washington?

Now if you want to suggest that the Bucs should renegotiate a TV deal or even a cable deal like SNY or NSG in New York in an effort to raise the revenue stream, then you can begin a discussion as to whether that is even possible or not. To simply make statements without substantiated detail is nothing more than whining while wearing horse blinders. That's the major complaint from most posters on this board and i agree with them.

[Kipper]

That is quite a huge assumption. Two sides are far apart on the deal and I think Cutch will just do the 1yr deals until he can be set free from (to quote a notorious catcher) "baseball hell"

Assumption or not the fact remains that payroll has to be set aside. They are negotiating, which takes time and as long as they are negotiting, the Pirates have plans to extend him which means setting a chunk of payroll sopace aside. The Pirates are sitting around $45-46 million right now. Probably head into the season around $50 million. That's not max payroll but when you figure you have extension possibilities in the upcoming year to Walker and Mccutchen....you don't want to be at your max limit already. If these guys were a couple of years down the road it would be different but they aren't.

Cutch won't do a 1 year deal. That's stupid. What Cutch wants IMO is to put forth a better season and raise his worth to get a better number than he can get now.

[PittPanthers90]

Cutch won't do a 1 year deal. That's stupid.

I should have stated Cutch will do the baseball 1 yr arbitration contracts untill he escapes